In re Adoption of P.J.H., 2019 IL App (5th) 190089

1. Case citation and parties
In re Adoption of P.J.H., 2019 IL App (5th) 190089 (Ill. App. Ct. Aug. 5, 2019). Petitioners/Appellees: Benjamin Gossard and Cheryl Hurst. Respondent/Appellant: Kohl Bertels (biological father). Trial court: Madison County (Mengarelli, J.). Judgment: affirmed.

2. Key legal issues
- Whether respondent is an unfit parent under the Adoption Act, 750 ILCS 50/1(D)(b) (failure to maintain a reasonable degree of interest, concern, or responsibility for the child’s welfare).
- Secondary allegation of “depravity” under 750 ILCS 50/1(D)(i) (multiple felony convictions) — raised but not relied on by the trial court. (The court did not disturb the trial court’s separate best‑interests finding.)

3. Holding/outcome
The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s termination of Kohl’s parental rights. The court sustained the finding of parental unfitness under §1(D)(b) (failure to maintain a reasonable degree of interest), and the best‑interests determination was not appealed.

4. Significant legal reasoning
- Standard of review: findings of parental unfitness are reviewed for manifest weight of the evidence; the trial court’s credibility assessments receive great deference. Unfitness must be proved by clear and convincing evidence. Best interests are decided by a preponderance.
- Facts supporting unfitness: repeated incarcerations, sporadic and erratic contact, no child support payments, drug/alcohol issues, and the trial court’s finding that petitioner mother reasonably refused visitation for safety concerns. Although Kohl had some contacts (birthday party, intermittent calls, Angel Tree donation), the court concluded those were insufficient to demonstrate a reasonable degree of interest/responsibility.
- Depravity claim: although the respondent had several felony convictions, the trial court declined to find depravity because he completed rehabilitative programming and a GED during his most recent incarceration.
- Precedent distinguished: Perkins (1981) was distinguished because there the father’s visitation attempts were found reasonable and frustrated by the mother; here the trial court found the opposite.

5. Practice implications (concise)
- Documentation matters: consistent, documented efforts to contact, support (payments, gifts with proof), and pursue legal remedies (paternity/visitation) are crucial to rebut §1(D)(b) claims.
- Incarceration is not dispositive but complicates the factual picture—rehabilitation can mitigate depravity claims, yet intermittent contact while free may still be held insufficient.
- Address parental substance‑use concerns proactively (treatment records, supervised visitation plans).
- Preserve and develop record on attempts to visit and obstacles (correspondence, jail call logs, third‑party corroboration).
- GAL reports and judicially noticed convictions carry weight; plan to counter or contextualize them at trial.